BHIKHARAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Accused-Petitioner has preferred this bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C., which is founded on FIR No.77/2016 of Police Station Baytu, District Barmer.

(2.) Initially, the aforementioned FIR was lodged by complainant, Shankar Lal, against unknown persons but during investigation name of petitioner, besides four others, surfaced and the petitioner was apprehended. Police, after investigation, submitted charge-sheet against the petitioner and four others for offence punishable under Sections 302, 201 & 120-B IPC and presently trial in Sessions Case No.27/2017 (255/2016) is in vogue before Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Barmer.

(3.) Learned Senior Counsel, Mr. Mahesh Bora, for the petitioner, submits that entire prosecution case is edificed on circumstantial evidence susceptible of to equally possible inferences and lacks requisite sting to implicate petitioner for commission of offence. Mr. Bora would contend that the evidence of criminal conspiracy by the petitioner and other accused persons is based on mere conjectures and surmises. Learned Senior Counsel has urged that alleged motive of the petitioner for commission of offence, as per prosecution, is his enmity with deceased but the evidence collected in this behalf by police is per se incongruous. It is urged by learned Senior Counsel that so called call details, collected by the police, showing communication between petitioner and other accused persons, is almost one and a half month anterior to the date of commission of offence, and therefore, on the strength of the same, involvement of the petitioner in commission of offence, is seriously questionable. While referring to the statements of witness-Poonam Chand, learned Senior Counsel has contended that a cumulative reading of his statements and the statements of other witnesses, prima facie, it is not possible to form an opinion that evidence is inculpatory so as to keep petitioner in incarceration, who is in custody since 17th of September, 2016. Lastly, learned Senior Counsel has argued that trial of the case is in vogue and the same is likely to take considerable time in its conclusion, is yet another mitigating factor for enlarging the petitioner on bail.